On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:38:11PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:54:22 +1100 Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Thanks Bruce. I might have to build a merged tree because one of the > > changes from the review modified a header file introduced in the NFS > > tree. > > > > I'll see how it goes, and see if I can avoid doing something that > > will make Linus yell at me :P > > If its a syntactic conflict with an obvious resolution, just leave it > (or maybe mention it in the pull request). It gives him something to > do so he feels useful. :-) Heh. It's not actually a conflict, though. The issue is that some of the review comments on the XFS side resulted in changes files introduced from the NFS tree. So the XFS side can't be merged without the NFS changes being present.... > /me notes that I did not see a conflict while merging the xfs tree in > linux-next today ... Because I haven't pushed them yet ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
